I've had a big problem with Michio Kaku's entire take on alternative/paranormal topics since a commercial I heard last year on an AM radio station
up here in Alaska that hosts his popular radio show on Sunday mornings.

I don't remember the exact words verbatim but what he basically said was that UFO's, the paranormal, none of it is real because these topics are
advocated by the very people that write the magazines about them, the books, etc.. He said if paranormal phenomenon was real it wouldn't need to be
advocated to the degree it currently is in popular culture.

That's his answer to the question of whether or not these things are real?

I have a huge problem with this statement!

For starters, I talked about this in the ATS thread from the old Michio Kaku ATS interview but IMO the statement is a mega cop-out!

For alot of reasons..

The reason non-scientists are the ones having to study the phenomenon in the first place is because the real scientists out there won't touch UFO's
or the paranormal with a 40 foot pole. Especially someone as notable and respected as Michio Kaku.

Then the scientists claim that there isn't any evidence to suggest the phenomenon is real which is totally and completely false.

The real reason these "non-scientists" are having to study and research UFO's and the paranormal is because noone else will do it. This means
their research and evidence are not peer reviewed. They're work is mostly ignored and/or written off completely and the real evidence lacks the
scientific scrutiny that is required to finally crack these mysteries.

The real reason we don't have true explanations for these mysteries is because the "scientists" out there refuse to acknowledge or otherwise study
and research these phenomenon. Out of fear. Fear of losing respect among their peers, fear of losing federal grants for big research projects and
fear of losing their jobs completely.

You can't write off a phenomenon as false when you haven't even studied it enough to have a valid opinion about it.

Noone within the mainstream scientific community has the right to judge UFO's and the paranormal when they haven't done the research required to
form anything even resembling a valid scientific conclusion. Thus, almost everything published about the paranormal and UFO's comes from people who
in many cases are average working folk like you and me.

It's so much easier for mainstream science to discredit these people and write off their research and evidence when the only real reason they're
publishing said books in the first place is because the scientists won't!

So you mean to tell me that the millions and millions of these people, commercial pilots, military pilots, police officers, astronauts, cosmonauts,
teachers, engineers, politicians, physicists and other military members from various backgrounds, are all either jumping to conclusions or suffering
from some inexplicable form of mass delusion?

It is nonsensical, even for Michio Kaku, to base his opinions about these subjects to "advocacy".. What a lame answer!

The truth is, Michio Kaku's own theories predict the existence of extraterrestrials and UFO's when he sais, at the same time, that they don't
exist.

If parallel, infinite universes are a reality (we all know this is Michio Kaku's favorite topic), then in at least one of those universes an alien
civilization was able to become scientifically advanced enough to send UFO's to visit earth.

And in at least one of those universes, perhaps they even figured out a way to travel between universes altogether. Maybe The aliens are advanced
humans from a parallel universe that have simply crossed over to our universe. Thus, even if planet earth was the only planet to ever evolve
organisms into intelligent life, it would still be possible for aliens to visit us here in this universe.

If infinite universes really exist out there in parallel realities, every possible outcome or possibility is a reality in at least one of those
universes.

New found discoveries unintelligible by previous limitations of technology and scientific method should not be seen as attacks against our sciences,
but rather a need to expand our hypotheses of the sciences to account for their place in the bigger picture.

Science at its heart is concerned with finding the truth of what is -- which by its own virtue attempts to leap over our constantly developing
subjective hypotheses of the world around us -- calling our discoveries the actual true objective states. In this process, science is forced to take
on the appearance that its method is conscious to all the possible phenomena, even those beyond the current potential of our microscopes, methods and
exposure of the universes beyond our grasp. When science claims what is the actual objective state of the infinite, science is no longer understood as
just a hypothesis created by the knowledge that presupposes the design of its own system. A system that is created by and limited to the current lens
and methods of science at the time and is also considered the guidelines for proving what is possible or true. When science is used to claim things as
the ultimate possibility of the objective, it conceals the new scientific breakthroughs and discoveries outside of its own limitations and sometimes
goes as far as discrediting its possibility prior to investigating the biggest breakthrough's of this century. What a method reveals is important,
but what is concealed by our scientific limitations should always be kept in mind when attempting to define the ultimate possible truth of the world
around us. History has shown us that time and time again, new discoveries unthought-of by previous principles of science, have created the need for
new hypotheses and expansions of scientific methods to account for what our old technology and scientific hypotheses couldn't.

I'd like to clarify however that these tendencies are usually found at a certain level of scientific development which typically includes professors
at educating level. They end up limiting their concern with discoveries only existing within the current hypotheses of science -- which claim to
reveal everything as objective. This dismisses new verifiable discoveries which require expansions to our current theories, as impossible, or pseudo
science. The professors can even feel as if they need not even test out these new discoveries for the sheer fact that their minds potential for
conceptualizing what's possible is still limited to the subjective hypotheses based on our current lenses and methods. New ideas that may seem
completely alien to a current approach indeed may become the standard of tomorrow

With the frenzy of UFO sightings that turn out to be airplanes, choppers, clouds, weather balloons, camera artifacts et al, and with a bevy of
pseudo-scientist and New Agers who sit and kundilini (levitate) and tell us they are remote viewing and using astral projections having conversations
with Aliens telepathically, I can only say thank the deities that there are "THE PHYSICISTS" I sooner go with the physicist than the QUACKS that are
out there trying to sell their magical elixirs to all the sheeple.

In the end it is the scientific report perfomed by scientist to determine
whether or not the photo, video or whatever evidence is presented, is
indeed a UFO, meaning unidentified, unless they identify said evidence as
a craft not of this earth!

Originally posted by BlasteR
So you mean to tell me that the millions and millions of these people, commercial pilots, military pilots, police officers, astronauts, cosmonauts,
teachers, engineers, politicians, physicists and other military members from various backgrounds, are all either jumping to conclusions or suffering
from some inexplicable form of mass delusion?
-ChriS

Thanks for your thoughtful post, Chris. You would be an even more effective arguer for the cause if you worked a little harder to understand what
'skeptics' are trying to say about what UFO reports mean. Your post revealed a sad over-simplistic and inaccurate representation of it.

Originally posted by spacevisitor
I am really a bit surprised that Michio Kaku comes forward with such remarks in public now, quite remarkable and important in my opinion.
I admire him as a man in his position for doing that.

Well, yes and no.

It's true that top scientists must consider what they say publicly, since they risk getting flogged for endorsing controversial theories.

I mean, who wants to end up like John Mack or James Watson?

Then again, Kaku is a string theorist, with one foot in the real world and the other in quantum physics.

Those who are familiar with quantum physics know that the world is not the Newtonian sandbox science imagined up until the 20th century,

There are a lot of things out in the Universe a lot stranger than the possibility of extraterrestial visitation,

Consider spooky-action-at-a-distance, wormholes, multiverses and the possibility of teleportation and time travel, and you might actually reach the
same conclusion as Enrico Fermi; they should be visiting us, so where are they?

Add to the fact that Kaku likes fame, and that his book sales logically peak every time he's on Coast to Coast show talking science vs UFOs,

I'm not so sure he's sticking his chin out, he might even be playing it safe.

Good to have someone as experienced as Jim Oberg contributing to a forum that has such a silly title as 'Aliens and Ufos'. Might just as well be
'Tomatoes and ufos'. For while aliens come from science fiction, as NASA historian Steven Dick has shown in his Life on Other Worlds, ufos, now
renamed uaps because they don't fly, remain a challenge to science, as Dick himself acknowledges in the same book.

But Jim Oberg is wrong to criticise Kaku and Kean on the 5% (or 2% or whatever) cutoff for 'genuine' ufos. In studies like Hynek et al's Night
Siege and the two superb, massive SOBEPS reports on the Belgian wave, by Profs Meessen, Brenig et al. (one thousand pages in professorial French),
which focus on cases within the 5%, we find hundreds of witnesses describing what appear to be unmanned, or rather unaliened, surveillance craft of a
design and performance far beyond current human capabilities. And these witness reports are backed by two crucial pieces of hard evidence; the Bob
Pozzuoli videotape, of a craft of this kind that Al Hibbs of JPL could not identify (Night Siege, p 123) and the Petit Rechain transparency, analysed
in great detail (in French) by the physicist Professor Meessen.

So if we look at the 5%, we do see something quite different from the misidentifications responsible for the 95%. Until Jim Oberg or others can
provide a mundane explanation for the Hudson Valley and Belgian waves, and the Pozzuoli and Petit Rechain imagery, logic forces us to conclude that
Kaku is right and Jim Oberg is wrong. And in the meantime Jim clearly has a lot of French homework to do.

Originally posted by spacevisitor
I am really a bit surprised that Michio Kaku comes forward with such remarks in public now, quite remarkable and important in my opinion.
I admire him as a man in his position for doing that.

Well, yes and no.

It's true that top scientists must consider what they say publicly, since they risk getting flogged for endorsing controversial theories.

I mean, who wants to end up like John Mack or James Watson?

For scientists or whomever coming forward by saying that UFOs or UAPs are real holds no risks whatsoever, but when scientists or whomever coming
forward by saying that UFOs or UAPs are real and definitely connected with extraterrestrial beings it will become a whole other ballgame.

Regarding the case of John Mack I thought that that was sadly enough a tragic accident.

Originally posted by Heliocentric
There are a lot of things out in the Universe a lot stranger than the possibility of extraterrestial visitation,

Consider spooky-action-at-a-distance, wormholes, multiverses and the possibility of teleportation and time travel, and you might actually reach the
same conclusion as Enrico Fermi; they should be visiting us, so where are they?

I cannot imagine what could be a lot stranger than the possibility/reality of extraterrestrial visitation?

And despite all those things you mention there I can never come to the same conclusion as Enrico Fermi anymore because I am alreay convinced that they
are visiting us.

Originally posted by Heliocentric

Add to the fact that Kaku likes fame, and that his book sales logically peak every time he's on Coast to Coast show talking science vs UFOs,

I see no problem in liking fame and that Kaku's book sales peak after a Coast to Coast show.

Originally posted by Heliocentric

I'm not so sure he's sticking his chin out, he might even be playing it safe.

In my opinion he's sticking his chin out but playing it safe at the same time.

This whole idea about people panicking and what not didn't ever made sense to me . Even if few fundamentals jump out of the window, who cares
?

I agree with you, maybe a couple of nuts will panic but I don't think society as a whole will panic just because we got an alien
signal on the Allen Telescope array, or any other kind of peaceful contact.

I think what it would take to make us panic in general would be for a fleet of motherships to surround the Earth like in Independence day and start
blasting major cities into piles of rubble. But in that situation disclosure isn't a question and the panic may be justified!

My theory...
If an alien presence did arrive tomorrow, any country with a nuclear weapon will fire at them. Especially the governments in which are directly run by
fundamentalist religious groups. People who suffer from mental illness will either try killing people, commit suicide, or go into a deep psychosis
stupor. Anyone who cannot handle stress or anxiety (normal folks who are compulsive) will also behave in a 'fight or flight' manner. You are looking
at a good 90% of the world population reacting in a negative manner.

United States and other countries will most likely hit 'Defcon I'; thus, they will prepare for mass panic and potential war.

Our first contact will most likely be with a hostile species, which is seeking to stake claim on our natural resources.

Originally posted by spacevisitor
He died in 1964 so I suppose he did experience due the years how right he was with his saying back then.

His biggest surprise was that Stalin didn't turn out to be the God-King he believed in during the Soviet years.... For all his imagination, he was a
rabid stalinist, and apologist or denier of all his crimes. Sad -- such vision and such blindness under one skull.

Originally posted by Lowneck
But Jim Oberg is wrong to criticise Kaku and Kean on the 5% (or 2% or whatever) cutoff for 'genuine' ufos. In studies like Hynek et al's Night
Siege and the two superb, massive SOBEPS reports on the Belgian wave, by Profs Meessen, Brenig et al. (one thousand pages in professorial French)

Isn't that the same SOBEPs report where SOBEPS eventually admitted they were wrong (meaning Jim Oberg is right?). Here is the documentary on
that case which says SOBEPs admitted they were wrong about the radar returns representing real objects:

The UFO files documentary starts at about 1 minute into this video:

The revelation about the bad radar data is at 8m20s and continues at the beginning of the next part:

And this is relevant to Leslie Kean's claim that when you have a radar return, it means there's something real there, obviously she couldn't be
more wrong as this case shows!!!!

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
It is the reports from pilots and military peeps, I have always found most interesting. These people are paid and trained to identify the sky and
whats in it and should have a better idea than most what constitutes a UFO.

-----
I'm not impressed by "military peeps" at all as observers of the night sky or the daytime sky. I've been an amateur astronomer for forty years &
have never seen anything I couldn't identify. I still believe UFOs exist, but observations of them are extremely rare.

1) I've never been a fan of the 'Ant Analogy' - for several reasons. Firstly, are ants capable of humor, sarcasm, love, highly complex thinking
and strategy? Are they loooking for intelligent (or, the meaning of) life, themselves? (obviously, this list could go on and on)

Next, while it may be true that any advanced civilization capable of reaching us (if not already here) would be as advanced (or more) to us that we
are to ants, at least we are likely to have more in common with an advanced civ - I think of this as a logorhythmic scale, if that makes sense.

Finally, if you subscribe to the ancient astronaut theory (which I do, it makes more sense than evolution or creation, imho), then we'll be a LOT
closer to them than ants to us.

2) Alien or not, at least people have to acknowledge that the 5% represents 1000s upon 1000s of reports, of 'technological entities',
performing manuevers and speeds that are absolutely impossible by anything we know of, it will be time for our governments/militaries to start
admitting that we do in fact have a LOT of supressed technology, including renewable energy. Can't have both ways, asses!

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.